Reading RA - From the Middle

Handball is not always what it seems

Both Manchester's Premiership clubs, United and City, have been involved in handball disputes in cup ties over the last couple of weeks.

The situations were very different but both illustrate the pressure decisions referees have to make. In the average game of football, probably the greatest numbers of appeals from players and spectators that go unheeded, are shouts for handball. Every time the ball hits a hand or arm, or the players think it has, the cry goes up
'handball'.

The first thing to remember, is that handball is the only one of the
nine penal offences that has to be intentional. Take tripping for instance. The referee doesn't have to consider what the intention of the player was. The player might honestly go for the ball but miss and bring down the opponent. It is still a direct free kick.

With handball the referee has to judge whether the intention was to handle the ball before penalising the player. Often disputes occur when the ball bounces up and hits the player on the hand or arm, or perhaps is kicked at such short range that the player can't get his hand or arm out of the way. Many people still think it makes a difference if the ball is brought under control even if the handball is
unintentional. That is not so. If it's accidental it's not an offence whatever the outcome.

The Manchester City FA Cup tie against Liverpool, highlighted another aspect of intentional handball. If you watched it on television you will recall that the only goal came after referee Uriah Rennie awarded a penalty for handball. City's Marc-Vivien Foe blocked the ball with his right arm when Liverpool's Valimir Smicer had crossed it into the City penalty area. Foe claimed that he had raised his arm for balance, not in a deliberate attempt to stop the ball.

This sort of situation arises quite often as an opponent goes to cross a ball and the player 'spreads' himself with arms in the air. Although he doesn't know where the ball is going, therefore not intentionally handling the ball in the usual sense, he is nevertheless using his arms as part of his defence. If the ball hits his hands or arm, most referee will act as Uriah Rennie did and consider it intentional handball.

Manchester United's appeal for handball in their Worthington Cup semi-final with Blackburn Rovers was something quite different. One thing I learnt many years ago, was only give handball when you actually see the player handle the ball. Sounds obvious I know, but sometimes a player brings the ball under control in such a way that you think it must be with his hand or arm although you didn't actually see it happen. I'm not tempted to blow because I have often
witnessed a player control the ball by a perfectly legitimate method, that seems to everyone else to be handball, particularly those that don't have the same view as you.

Manchester United's late shot on goal was blocked on the goal line by a Blackburn player in a way that looked to the United players, and most people in the ground as handball. The slow motion television replay however showed that the referee was right to ignore their appeals. Although the player had crooked his arm, he quite clearly chested the ball down. At the end of the game the United players converged on the referee to protest vehemently about the decision.

I hope that when they review it on video they realise that things are not always what they seem and the referee was correct. It would be nice to think that they would then apologise to the referee for doubting his decision but I expect to see pigs fly from Old Trafford to Maine Road before that happens.

Dick Sawdon Smith

Back To Contents